After TADS, can we measure up, catch up, and ante up?

Psychological therapies versus antidepressant medication, alone and in combination for depression in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorders are common in children and adolescents and, if left untreated, are likely to recur in adulthood. Depression is highly debilitating, affecting psychosocial, family and academic functioning.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of psychological therapies and antidepressant medication, alone and in combination, for the treatment of depressive disorder in children and adolescents. We have examined clinical outcomes including remission, clinician and self reported depression measures, and suicide-related outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) to 11 June 2014. The register contains reports of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), and PsycINFO (1967 to date).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were eligible for inclusion if they compared i) any psychological therapy with any antidepressant medication, or ii) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a psychological therapy alone, or an antidepressant medication alone, or iii) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a placebo or'treatment as usual', or (iv) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a psychological therapy or antidepressant medication plus a placebo.We included studies if they involved participants aged between 6 and 18 years, diagnosed by a clinician as having Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed the quality of the studies. We applied a random-effects meta-analysis, using the odds ratio (OR) to describe dichotomous outcomes, mean difference (MD) to describe continuous outcomes when the same measures were used, and standard mean difference (SMD) when outcomes were measured on different scales.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eleven studies, involving 1307 participants in this review. We also identified one ongoing study, and two additional ongoing studies that may be eligible for inclusion. Studies recruited participants with different severities of disorder and with a variety of comorbid disorders, including anxiety and substance use disorder, therefore limiting the comparability of the results. Regarding the risk of bias in studies, just under half the studies had adequate allocation concealment (there was insufficient information to determine allocation concealment in the remainder), outcome assessors were blind to the participants' intervention in six studies, and in general, studies reported on incomplete data analysis methods, mainly using intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. For the majority of outcomes there were no statistically significant differences between the interventions compared. There was limited evidence (based on two studies involving 220 participants) that antidepressant medication was more effective than psychotherapy on measures of clinician defined remission immediately post-intervention (odds ratio (OR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.98), with 67.8% of participants in the medication group and 53.7% in the psychotherapy group rated as being in remission. There was limited evidence (based on three studies involving 378 participants) that combination therapy was more effective than antidepressant medication alone in achieving higher remission from a depressive episode immediately post-intervention (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.47), with 65.9% of participants treated with combination therapy and 57.8% of participants treated with medication, rated as being in remission. There was no evidence to suggest that combination therapy was more effective than psychological therapy alone, based on clinician rated remission immediately post-intervention (OR 1.82, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.68).Suicide-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) were reported in various ways across studies and could not be combined in meta-analyses. However, some trials measured suicidal ideation using standardised assessment tools suitable for meta-analysis. In one study involving 188 participants, rates of suicidal ideation were significantly higher in the antidepressant medication group (18.6%) compared with the psychological therapy group (5.4%) (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.72) and this effect appeared to remain at six to nine months (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.98), with 13.6% of participants in the medication group and 3.9% of participants in the psychological therapy group reporting suicidal ideation. It was unclear what the effect of combination therapy was compared with either antidepressant medication alone or psychological therapy alone on rates of suicidal ideation. The impact of any of the assigned treatment packages on drop out was also mostly unclear across the various comparisons in the review.Limited data and conflicting results based on other outcome measures make it difficult to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of any specific intervention based on these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence upon which to base conclusions about the relative effectiveness of psychological interventions, antidepressant medication and a combination of these interventions. On the basis of the available evidence, the effectiveness of these interventions for treating depressive disorders in children and adolescents cannot be established. Further appropriately powered RCTs are required.

Feasibility of Attachment Based Family Therapy for depressed clinic-referred Norwegian adolescents

Several studies have earned Attachment Based Family Therapy (ABFT) the designation of a promising empirically supported treatment for adolescents with depression. This study evaluated the feasibility of importing ABFT into a hospital-based outpatient clinic in Norway. This article documents the challenges of initiating and conducting research in a real world clinical setting and training staff therapists. It also reports on outcomes of a pilot randomized clinical trial. Implementation barriers rapidly emerged in relation to hospital administration, infrastructure development, and therapists. Despite these barriers, 20 clinic-referred adolescents were randomly assigned to ABFT (n= 11) or to Treatment as Usual (TAU) (n= 9). Adolescents in ABFT showed significantly better symptom reduction compared to adolescents in TAU with an effect size of 1.08. While preliminary, this study suggests that Norwegian clinical staff therapists could be engaged in learning and delivering ABFT, and in producing promising treatment results. The importance of institutional support for dissemination research is highlighted.

Psychological therapies versus antidepressant medication, alone and in combination for depression in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorders are common in children and adolescents and, if left untreated, are likely to recur in adulthood. Depression is highly debilitating, affecting psychosocial, family and academic functioning.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of psychological therapies and antidepressant medication, alone and in combination, for the treatment of depressive disorder in children and adolescents. We have examined clinical outcomes including remission, clinician and self reported depression measures, and suicide-related outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) to 11 November 2011. This register contains reports of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), and PsycINFO (1967 to date).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were eligible for inclusion if they compared i) any psychological therapy with any antidepressant medication, or ii) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a psychological therapy alone, or an antidepressant medication alone, or iii) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a placebo or 'treatment as usual', or (iv) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a psychological therapy or antidepressant medication plus a placebo.We included studies if they involved participants aged between 6 and 18 years, diagnosed by a clinician as having Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed the quality of the studies. We applied a random-effects meta-analysis, using the odds ratio (OR) to describe dichotomous outcomes, mean difference (MD) to describe continuous outcomes when the same measures were used, and standard mean difference (SMD) when outcomes were measured on different scales.

MAIN RESULTS

We included ten studies, involving 1235 participants in this review. Studies recruited participants with different severities of disorder and with a variety of comorbid disorders, including anxiety and substance use disorder, therefore limiting the comparability of the results. Regarding the risk of bias in studies, half the studies had adequate allocation concealment (there was insufficient information to determine allocation concealment in the remainder), outcome assessors were blind to the participants' intervention in six studies, and in general, studies reported on incomplete data analysis methods, mainly using intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. For the majority of outcomes there were no statistically significant differences between the interventions compared. There was limited evidence (based on two studies involving 220 participants) that antidepressant medication was more effective than psychotherapy on measures of clinician defined remission immediately post-intervention (odds ratio (OR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.98), with 67.8% of participants in the medication group and 53.7% in the psychotherapy group rated as being in remission. There was limited evidence (based on three studies involving 378 participants) that combination therapy was more effective than antidepressant medication alone in achieving higher remission from a depressive episode immediately post-intervention (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.47), with 65.9% of participants treated with combination therapy and 57.8% of participants treated with medication, rated as being in remission. There was no evidence to suggest that combination therapy was more effective than psychological therapy alone, based on clinician rated remission immediately post-intervention (OR 1.82, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.68).Suicide-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) were reported in various ways across studies and could not be combined in meta-analyses. However suicidal ideation specifically was generally measured and reported using standardised assessment tools suitable for meta-analysis. In one study involving 188 participants, rates of suicidal ideation were significantly higher in the antidepressant medication group (18.6%) compared with the psychological therapy group (5.4%) (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.72) and this effect appeared to remain at six to nine months (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.36), with 13.6% of participants in the medication group and 3.9% of participants in the psychological therapy group reporting suicidal ideation. It was unclear what the effect of combination therapy was compared with either antidepressant medication alone or psychological therapy alone on rates of suicidal ideation. The impact of any of the assigned treatment packages on drop out was also mostly unclear across the various comparisons in the review.Limited data and conflicting results based on other outcome measures make it difficult to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of any specific intervention based on these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence upon which to base conclusions about the relative effectiveness of psychological interventions, antidepressant medication and a combination of these interventions. On the basis of the available evidence, the effectiveness of these interventions for treating depressive disorders in children and adolescents cannot be established. Further appropriately powered RCTs are required.

What are specialist mental health clinician attitudes to guideline recommendations for the treatment of depression in young people?

OBJECTIVES

We sought to examine potential barriers to the use of evidence-based guidelines for youth depression in a tertiary specialist mental health service, as part of an initiative to implement evidence based practice within the service.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study adopting a social constructionist perspective using focus groups. The focus groups, conducted with all clinicians (medical and allied health), were audiotaped, transcribed and thematic analysis was undertaken. Clinicians were asked about the barriers to implementing four key recommendations from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines.

RESULTS

Barriers existed at (i) the individual clinician level; (ii) the clinical level in terms of the presentation of young people; and (iii) the service level. The key individual clinician level barrier was a stated belief that the guidelines were not relevant to the young people presenting to the service, with little evidence to guide practice. Related, the main barrier with regard to the clinical presentation was the severity and complexity of this presentation, often making the delivery of interventions like cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) difficult. At the service level, a lack of integration with primary and secondary level care meant sequencing interventions according to guideline recommendations was difficult.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a clear imperative to develop the evidence base to ensure that effective treatments for young people aged up to 25 years with severe and complex disorders that include comorbid conditions, suicide risk and psychosocial difficulties are investigated and disseminated. Furthermore, this work has highlighted the need for greater investment in models of care that ensure integration between existing primary and secondary care and enhanced specialist early intervention mental health services for young people.

Treatment-resistant depression in adolescents: is the addition of cognitive behavioral therapy of benefit?

Background

Many young people with major depression fail first-line treatments. Treatment-resistant depression has various definitions in the literature but typically assumes nonresponse to medication. In young people, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is the recommended first-line intervention, thus the definition of treatment resistance should be expanded. Therefore, our aim was to synthesize the existing evidence of any interventions for treatment-resistant depression, broadly defined, in children and adolescents and to investigate the effectiveness of CBT in this context.

Methods

We used Cochrane Collaboration methodology, with electronic searches of Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis Group trials registers. Only randomized controlled trials were included, and were assessed for risk of bias. Meta- analysis was undertaken where possible and appropriate.

Results

Of 953 articles retrieved, four trials were eligible for inclusion. For one study, only the trial registration document was available, because the study was never completed. All other studies were well conducted with a low risk of bias, although one study had a high dropout rate. Two studies assessed the effect of adding CBT to medication. While an assertive trial of antidepressants does appear to lead to benefit, when compared with placebo, there was no significant advantage, in either study, or in a meta-analysis of data from these trials, that clearly demonstrated an additional benefit of CBT. The third trial showed little advantage of a tricyclic antidepressant over placebo in the context of an inpatient admission.

Conclusion

Few randomized controlled trials have investigated interventions for treatment-resistant depression in young people, and results from these show modest benefit from antidepressants with no additional benefit over medication from CBT. Overall, there is a lack of evidence about effective interventions to treat young people who have failed to respond to evidence-based interventions for depression. Research in this area is urgently required.

A critical evaluation of the role of cognitive behaviour therapy in children and adolescents with depression

Depressive disorders are relatively common in adolescents although less so in younger children. They accrue significant morbidity and frequent long-term sequelae as well as increased suicide risk in sufferers. Evidence-based treatment of depression in children and adolescents is the subject of intense investigation and debate. This article reviews the current evidence base for cognitive behaviour therapy in this group and makes recommendations for further areas of research.

SSRIs and depression in children and adolescents: the imperative for shared decision-making

OBJECTIVE

In the context of controversy and uncertainty about the role of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for the treatment of depressive disorders in children and adolescents, we consider the evidence of the benefits and risks of this class of medication and the possible role of shared decision-making as a practical way to guide clinicians, young people and their families through treatment decisions.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that there is an imperative for clinicians to engage young people in a process of shared decision-making, given the uncertainties about SSRI medication in this age group. Shared decision-making provides a way for clinicians to engage young people and ensure they receive the treatment required for this disorder, the potential outcomes of which are severe.

Prevention and early intervention for depression in young people--a practical possibility?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Many studies aimed at prevention and early intervention for mental disorders have focused on depressive disorder because it causes substantial disability. In this review, recent developments in prevention and early intervention with children and adolescents who are depressed are summarized.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite early promise, there is little evidence that prevention of depression is a practical possibility at this stage. There is no clear evidence of effectiveness for universal programmes. Targeted programmes are more promising, with evidence of short-term reduction in depressive symptoms, and there are a few studies in which there is evidence of a reduced incidence of disorder. There are promising developments in efforts to screen for disorder, although there is a requirement for more effective therapy. Potential cost-savings are considerable, so it is imperative that the search continues for effective interventions for depression in young people. Attention to wider social issues that impact on mental health is also needed.

SUMMARY

Developing preventive services for depression is premature at this stage. There is evidence to support screening for depression and providing early intervention, but current treatments have limited effectiveness. There is a compelling need for further research in this area.